Public views about editing genes in wildlife for conservation

Area of Science:

• Conservation genetics
• Applied biotechnology
• Public perception of science

Background:

• CRISPR gene-editing advancements prompt proposals for wildlife conservation applications.
• Emerging controversies surround the ethical implications and potential consequences of wildlife gene editing.
• Limited understanding exists regarding public views on genetic engineering in nature.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess U.S. public understanding and beliefs about gene editing in wildlife.
• To examine concerns related to gene editing in animal and plant wildlife.
• To explore how cultural dispositions and beliefs about nature influence these views.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of survey data from 1600 U.S. adults (YouGov).
• Examination of concerns about gene editing in wildlife.
• Assessment of the influence of cultural dispositions and beliefs about nature intervention.

Main Results:

• Respondents perceived greater risks than benefits associated with wildlife gene editing.
• Over 70% feared gene editing in wildlife could be misused.
• Applications to aid endangered species survival were viewed as more morally acceptable than those reducing populations.

Conclusions:

• Public opinion indicates significant concern and skepticism towards wildlife gene editing for conservation.
• A cautious, 'take-it-slow' approach to decision-making is recommended.
• Ongoing public consultation is crucial as opinions on this technology are still developing.